Statistical Relationships of Storm Runoff Constituents with Storm Event Characteristics in Nine California Urban Watersheds

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Donald Duke ◽  
Alfred Mbah ◽  
George P. Yanev
Keyword(s):  
Storm Runoff ◽  
Storm Event ◽  
Urban Watersheds ◽  
Statistical Relationships

scholarly journals Spectrum of storm event hydrologic response in urban watersheds

2013 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 2649-2663 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. K. Smith ◽  
J. A. Smith ◽  
M. L. Baeck ◽  
G. Villarini ◽  
D. B. Wright
Keyword(s):  
Storm Event ◽  
Urban Watersheds ◽  
Hydrologic Response

scholarly journals Flash flooding in small urban watersheds: Storm event hydrologic response

2016 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 4571-4589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Long Yang ◽  
James A. Smith ◽  
Mary Lynn Baeck ◽  
Yan Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Storm Event ◽  
Urban Watersheds ◽  
Hydrologic Response ◽  
Flash Flooding

Weather Radar Network Benefit Model for Nontornadic Thunderstorm Wind Casualty Cost Reduction

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 789-804 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Y. N. Cho ◽  
James M. Kurdzo
Keyword(s):  
Cost Reduction ◽  
Flash Flood ◽  
Cost Model ◽  
Weather Radar ◽  
Storm Event ◽  
Radar Network ◽  
Density Maps ◽  
Update Rate ◽  
Statistical Relationships ◽  
First Time

AbstractAn econometric geospatial benefit model for nontornadic thunderstorm wind casualty reduction is developed for meteorological radar network planning. Regression analyses on 22 years (1998–2019) of storm event and warning data show, likely for the first time, a clear dependence of nontornadic severe thunderstorm warning performance on radar coverage. Furthermore, nontornadic thunderstorm wind casualty rates are observed to be negatively correlated with better warning performance. In combination, these statistical relationships form the basis of a cost model that can be differenced between radar network configurations to generate geospatial benefit density maps. This model, applied to the current contiguous U.S. weather radar network, yields a benefit estimate of $207 million (M) yr−1 relative to no radar coverage at all. The remaining benefit pool with respect to enhanced radar coverage and scan update rate is about $36M yr−1. Aggregating these nontornadic thunderstorm wind results with estimates from earlier tornado and flash flood cost reduction models yields a total benefit of $1.12 billion yr−1 for the present-day radars and a remaining radar-based benefit pool of $778M yr−1.

scholarly journals Selection of an appropriately simple storm runoff model

2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 5753-5782 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. I. J. M. van Dijk
Keyword(s):  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Storm Runoff ◽  
Storm Event ◽  
Model Structure ◽  
Optimal Model ◽  
Daily Streamflow ◽  
Storm Flow ◽  
Final Prediction Error ◽  
Free Parameters ◽  
Runoff Model

Abstract. Alternative conceptual storm runoff models, including several published ones, were evaluated against storm flow time series for 260 catchments in Australia (23–1902 km2). The original daily streamflow data was separated into baseflow and storm flow components and from these, event rainfall and storm flow totals were estimated. For each tested model structure, the number of free parameters was reduced in stages. The appropriate balance between simplicity and explanatory power was decided based on Aikake's Final Prediction Error Criterion and evidence of parameter equivalence. The majority of catchments showed storm recession half-times in the order of a day, with more rapid drainage in dry catchments. Overland and channel travel time did not appear to be an important driver of storm flow recession. A storm runoff model with two free parameters (one related to storm event size, the other to antecedent baseflow) and a fixed initial loss of 12 mm provided the optimal model structure. The optimal model had some features similar to the Soil Conservation Service Curve Number technique, but performed an average 12 to 19% better. The non-linear relationship between event rainfall and event runoff may be associated with saturated area expansion during storms and/or the relationship between storm event size and peak rainfall intensity. Antecedent baseflow was a strong predictor of runoff response. A simple conceptual relationship between groundwater storage and saturated catchment area proved adequate and produced realistic estimates of saturated area of <0.1% for the driest and >5% for the wettest catchments.

scholarly journals Review on uncertainty of the first-flush phenomenon in diffuse pollution control

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdullah Al Mamun ◽  
Shahriar Shams ◽  
Md. Nuruzzaman
Keyword(s):  
Best Management Practices ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Nonpoint Source ◽  
Diffuse Pollution ◽  
Storm Runoff ◽  
Storm Event ◽  
First Flush ◽  
Storm Events ◽  
Treatment Facility ◽  
Small Catchments

AbstractSeveral definitions and criteria of the first-flush are being used to assess and control the nonpoint source (diffuse) pollution. The common consensus is that the first-flush is generally noticed in the small catchments (e.g. < 10 ha) of regular shapes. It is also considered that 80% of the pollution load can be captured by capturing 30% of the runoff volume, which is assumed to be due to first-flush of the storm event. However, such phenomenon is uncertain in the considerably large catchments, principally due to the dilution and delay in transport of the pollutant. This paper critically examines the ‘first-flush’ phenomenon in controlling diffuse pollution based on various studies conducted by the researchers. Based on the review, it can be inferred that the first-flush may be an effective criterion for sizing on-site treatment facilities for small catchments (with similar dimensions of length and width), from where the runoff is expected to reach the treatment facility (roughly) at the same time. However, for the large and elongated catchments with an area covering more than 10 ha, a huge volume of storm runoff needs to be captured that would make the treatment system large or less effective. As such, for the community and regional facilities; the presence of the first-flush needs to be confirmed based on the sampling and analysis of data collected from several storm events of different durations and intensities. Therefore, the use of the first-flush phenomenon should not be applied for the design of storm runoff treatment facility in large drainage system (say > 10 ha) without on-site monitoring being conducted. However, it is also recommended to come up with a simplistic approach of designing the best management practices (BMPs) to capture and treat certain depth of the initial storm runoff (e.g. first 20 mm), which will help reduce the effect of nonpoint source (NPS) pollution.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document